Wednesday Liturgy: Mixing Blessed and Unblessed Oils

ROME, JAN. 30, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: If a priest is running out of the holy oil for anointing the sick blessed by the bishop at the Holy Thursday Chrism Mass, may he mix other unblessed oil with the remaining oil? -- C.B., Detroit, Michigan

A: The proper matter for this sacrament is olive oil or, if olive oil is unavailable, some other oil made from plants.

The general norm is that the holy oils to be used should those blessed by the bishop. This oil is blessed for the whole year at the Chrism Mass.

The Roman ritual of anointing (no. 22) encourages the minister of anointing to "make sure that the oil remains fit for use and should replenish it from time to time, either yearly when the bishop blesses the oil on Holy Thursday or more frequently if necessary."

Canon 847 of the Code of Canon Law further enjoins priests to obtain recently consecrated or blessed oils from his own bishop and not to use old oils except in case of necessity.

If a parish is running short, then the priest could inquire at the cathedral, as many dioceses keep a reserve supply during the year. One may also ask at another parish, especially one that has no hospitals, if it can spare some oil.

When a priest has no blessed oil and a grave need occurs, Canon 999 provides him with a solution so that nobody might be deprived of the grace of this sacrament. It states that any priest may bless the oil in a case of necessity but only in the actual celebration of the sacrament.

Although the canon restricts the priest's blessing of the oil to cases of necessity it does not determine the degree of the necessity and the priest may judge it in each case.

If this is done, the ritual explains that any oil blessed by the priest and left over after the celebration of the sacrament, should be absorbed in cotton or cotton wool and burned.

Because of the priest's faculty of blessing the holy oils in case of need, the questions about using or mixing in unblessed oils should no longer be an issue.

Previously, the general opinion was that the use of unblessed oil or oil blessed by an unauthorized priest was of doubtful validity. The Holy See had responded negatively to propositions favoring these opinions, but it did so in terms that did not entirely settle the question from the dogmatic point of view.

The debate remained open among theologians regarding the possibility of using a different holy oil blessed by the bishop (either the chrism or the oil of catechumens) for the sacrament of the sick. Also unsettled was the question of whether mixing blessed and unblessed oil invalidated the sacramental matter.

Many theologians approved of the first opinion: that different holy oils could be used. Fewer theologians, however, proposed the possibility of mixing blessed and unblessed oils.

The questions were never definitively resolved and, as we mentioned, have been superseded by the new discipline allowing the priest to bless the oils.

No matter what the theological opinions might have been, all were in agreement that priests administrating this sacrament should follow exactly the Church's liturgical norms and not risk any danger of invalidity. This advice remains valid today.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Attending Sunday Mass at Other Parishes

ROME, JAN. 30, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Some readers intimated that I had perhaps read too much into Canons 209-210 by suggesting that it implied supporting one's local parish (see Jan. 16). Although the expression "particular church" usually means "diocese" in canonical terms, most Catholics support their local church through their parish.

Likewise, according to Canon 107, Catholics, unlike most Protestants, generally acquire their pastor through place of residence (technically domicile or quasi-domicile) as canon law presumes laws to be territorial. Even when, as frequently happens in the United States, a Catholic registers and worships in a parish different from his or her territorial parish, this latter parish remains the proper channel and authority for any permissions and dispensations required by canon law.

The widespread custom in the United States of people registering at a parish other than their territorial parish is rather the exception than the norm. This is perhaps due to the ease of mobility in that country and also because the concept of parish territoriality is somewhat weaker as historically many national parishes were established to cater to successive waves of immigrants.

Catholic worship around the world has historically revolved around territorial parishes forming a worshipping community. I would sustain that consequently Catholics should generally assist and support their local parish, supposing that the faithful's right to authentic Catholic worship is provided for in that parish.

This is not a strict legal obligation, however, and the code is sufficiently flexible to allow for differences in religious sensibilities in practice and worship.

For example, Canon 112 on changing from one Catholic rite to another is illustrative. Canon 112 sets strict conditions for a Latin-rite Catholic to switch rites to an Eastern Catholic Church. In most cases this requires permission from the Apostolic See.

Canon 112.2 states that not even prolonged practice and reception of the sacraments in another ritual Church entails enrollment in that Church. In effect the canon distinguishes membership from liturgical practice. Any Catholic is allowed, even habitually, to receive most sacraments in a ritual Church different from his or her ritual Church, without formally becoming a member of the Church.

For instance, if, for solid spiritual reasons, an adult baptized and confirmed in the Roman rite begins to practice in a Maronite parish, he or she may receive the Eucharist, the sacrament of reconciliation, and anointing of the sick without any need to formally switch rites. If a man in this situation wished to enter holy orders, or if a couple of Latin-rite Catholics wish to marry according to the Maronite rite, then permission would normally be needed to formally switch rites.

If this flexibility is practiced among various Catholic rites, even more so it may be observed among diverse parishes of the same rite.

Father Cantalamessa on Seeking and Giving Love

ROME, JAN. 26, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of a commentary by the Pontifical Household preacher, Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, on the readings from this Sunday's liturgy.

* * *

Unless you have charity...
Fourth Sunday in Ordinary Time
Jeremiah 1:4-5, 17-19; 1 Corinthians 12:31-13:13; Luke 4:21-30

This Sunday's Gospel narrates the rejection Jesus meets at Nazareth, his hometown, the first time he returns after beginning his public ministry. This rejection elicits the famous remark, "No prophet is accepted in his own country."

We commented on Mark's account of this episode last year; we can therefore focus our attention on the second reading where we find a very important message. This is Paul's celebrated hymn to charity. Charity is the religious term for love. This is, then, a hymn to love, perhaps the most celebrated and sublime ever written.

When Christianity appeared on the world's stage, love had already employed various singers. The most illustrious was Plato who wrote an entire treatise on it. The common name for love at that time was "eros" (this is where we get "erotic" and "eroticism" from).

Christianity sensed that this passionate and desirous love was not adequate to express the novelty of the biblical concept. For this reason it avoided the term "eros" and substituted that of "agape," which could be translated as "spiritual love" or "charity" -- although the latter term has come to acquire a too restricted meaning: doing charity, works of charity.

The difference between "eros" and "agape" is this. Desirous or erotic love is exclusive; it is consummated between two persons; the interference of a third person would mean its destruction, its betrayal. Sometimes the birth of a child can throw this kind of love into a crisis.

The giving type of love, "agape," on the contrary embraces everyone, no one can be excluded, not even enemies. The classical formula of "eros" is pronounced by Violetta in Verdi's opera "La Traviata": "Love me, Alfredo. Love me as much as I love you."

The classical formula of "agape" is that of Jesus who says: "As I have loved you, love one another." This latter is a love that is meant to circulate, to expand.

Another difference is this. Erotic love, in the more typical form of "falling in love," does not last long, or it lasts only by changing its object, that is, by falling in love with different people successively. Of charity, however, St. Paul says that it "remains," indeed it is the only thing that remains in eternity, even after faith and hope have ceased.

But between these two loves -- that of seeking and that of giving -- there is not separation and contraposition, but rather development and growth.

"Eros" is the point of departure for us and "agape" is the point of arrival. Between them there is room for a whole education and growth in love. Let us take the most common case which is love between two persons.

In the love between a husband and wife "eros" prevails at the beginning, attraction, reciprocal desire, the conquering of the other, and so a certain egoism. If this love does not make an effort to enrich itself along the way with a new dimension, one of gratuity, of reciprocal tenderness, of a capacity to forget oneself for the other, and to project itself into children, we all know how it will end.

Paul's message is quite relevant today. The entertainment and advertising worlds seem bent on inculcating in young people that love is reducible to "eros" and that "eros" is reducible to sex. Life is presented as a continual idol in a world where everything is beautiful, young, and healthy; where there is no growing old, no sickness, and everyone can spend as much as they want.

But this is a colossal lie that generates unrealistic expectations, which, once they are not met, provoke frustration, rebellion against family and society, and often open the door to crime. The word of God makes it such that the critical sense in people is not altogether extinguished when this illusory vision of life is daily proposed to them.

Wednesday Liturgy: Office of Readings the Evening Before

ROME, JAN. 23, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: Two questions about the Office of Readings: 1) I like to pray it the evening before. How early can I do so? After 5 p.m., or "sundown," or when? 2) When I pray the Office of the Readings the evening before, should I do so before or after I pray Compline? -- J.J., San Francisco, California

A: The Office of Readings is the longest of the five offices of the Liturgy of the Hours which all priests and transitional deacons are required to pray daily as an intrinsic part of their ministry of sanctification and intercession. Many permanent deacons and religious also pray it either voluntarily or as part of their rule.

In recent years, following the reforms promoted by the Second Vatican Council, praying the Divine Office, in whole or in part, has become increasingly popular among lay people who desire to unite themselves to the Church's official prayer either as individual or in groups.

By doing so they participate not only in prayer within Christ's body but also in a truly liturgical manner, that is, prayer of Christ's body, and thus, in a certain manner, in the prayer of Christ himself.

In its present form the office consists of the same elements of the other offices: an opening hymn, three relatively short psalms or segments of longer psalms, versicle, responsories and closing prayer. Primarily however, this office is characterized by two substantial readings, one taken from the Old or New Testament (except the Gospel) and the other taken from the writings of the Fathers of the Church, the saints, or from the Church's magisterium.

The second reading is usually related to the Scripture reading either as a commentary or as a reflection on one of the themes contained in the Scripture lesson. On saints days the second reading often highlights one of the saint's characteristic virtues or is taken from his or her own writings.

The purpose of these readings is similar to a "lectio divina," or spiritual reading. They are meant to spur meditation and reflection on God's Word and how to live it guided by the best of spiritual writers and therefore to shape our way of thinking according to a truly Christian standard.

This office, originally called Matins, derived from the monastic custom of rising during the night to pray before dawn. This practice, in turn, probably stemmed from the earlier tradition of Christians holding all-night prayer vigils.

While the Office of Readings retains this character of nocturnal praise, it is permitted to pray it at other times during the day. And, as our reader points out, it is also possible to anticipate it on the evening before. It is also possible to join it with other offices, especially Morning Prayer.

If prayed the evening before, it should follow Evening Prayer (Vespers) of the day. Thus, if I wish to anticipate Tuesday's reading on Monday, I should first pray Monday's Evening Prayer.

If, on some occasion the Office of Readings is united to Vespers, both offices must be of the same day. That is, I may not join Tuesday's reading with Monday's Vespers. It is possible, however, to pray both Offices of Readings on the same day.

This should also answer the second question. The Office of Readings may be prayed either before or after Night Prayer, or Compline. All the same, unless one wishes to celebrate Readings as a nocturnal office, liturgical sense would prefer to pray it before Compline so as not to obscure this office's role as a conclusion of the day and a preparation for the night.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Explaining the Mass

ROME, JAN. 23, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

After our reflections on explaining the Mass within Mass (Jan. 9) some readers asked if the homily could be used to explain some aspects.

While it is generally recommended that the homily be based on the readings, this is not an absolute rule. The homily may also occasionally focus on one of the liturgical prayers, such as the collect, from the feast or occasion being celebrated. Or it may even be used to explain other elements of doctrine, liturgical theology, and the meaning of the parts of the Mass.

If this can be integrated with the readings of the day, all the better. But this is not always possible. At the same time I would be hesitant to depart from the readings on a regular basis as this could weaken the faithful's understanding of the importance of God's Word within the overall structure of the celebration.

I personally prefer using the commentaries for such explanations. They are usually closer to the actual moment in which the rite being explained is to be carried out, and this is generally more effective.

Helping the faithful gain a deeper understanding of the Mass is a pastoral necessity. Decisions as to the best means (commentaries or homilies) to achieve that goal are also pastoral and may differ from place to place.

Several readers asked if there are any recommended resources to help people understand what is going on at Mass and the meaning of the various rites.

Although I do not know any source capable of answering all possible questions -- if there were, my task would be a lot easier -- I can recommend a couple of fairly recent books that would help both the inquiring layman and the priest in search of concise explanations.

Father Jeremy Driscoll's "What Happens at Mass" and Scott Hahn's "The Lamb's Supper" are both excellent and accessible introductions to the Mass that complement each other very well.

Another interesting, albeit more technical, source is Father Jovian Lang's "Dictionary of the Liturgy," which offers concise definitions and illustrations on a wide range of liturgical topics.

Father Cantalamessa on Evangelical History

ROME, JAN. 19, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of a commentary by the Pontifical Household preacher, Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, on the readings from this Sunday's liturgy.

* * *

Are the Gospels Historical Records?
Third Sunday in Ordinary Time
Nehemiah 8:2-4a,5-6,8-10; 1 Corinthians 12:12-31a; Luke 1:1-4;4:14-21

Before beginning the account of the life of Jesus, the Evangelist Luke explains the criteria that guided him. He says that he is referring to facts attested to by eye witnesses, which he verified by "accurate research," so that those who read what he writes may realize the solidity of the teachings contained in the Gospel. This provides us with an occasion to consider the problem of the historicity of the Gospels.

Until some centuries ago, the critical sense did not exist in people. What was referred to in the past was taken as having been an historical event. In the last two or three centuries the historical sense was born which brought people to submit things to a critical test to ascertain their validity before they would believe them to be facts of the past. This procedure has been applied to the Gospels.

Let us sum up the various stages that the life and teaching of Jesus have passed through before they have reached us.

First stage: Jesus' earthly life. Jesus did not write anything, but in his preaching he used some common expediencies of ancient culture which facilitated keeping a text in one's memory: brief phrases, parallels and antitheses, rhythmic repetitions, images, parables.… Think of lines from the Gospels like: "The last will be first and the first will be last"; "Wide is the door and broad is the way that leads to perdition…; "Narrow is the gate and hard is the way that leads to life" (Matthew 7:13-14).

Phrases like these, once heard, would even be difficult for people today to forget. The fact that Jesus himself did not write the Gospels does not mean that the words that they contain are not his. Unable to write words on paper, the men of ancient times wrote them on the mind.

Second stage: the oral preaching of the apostles. After the resurrection, the apostles immediately began to proclaim to all the life and words of Christ, taking account of the needs and the circumstances of the different listeners. There purpose was not to do history but to bring people to faith. With the clearer understanding that they now had, they were able to transmit to others that which Jesus said and did, adapting it to the needs of those to whom they turned.

Third stage: the written gospels. About 30 years after Jesus' death, some authors began to write down this preaching that had come to them orally. The four Gospels that we know were born in this way. Of the many things that had come down to them, the evangelists selected some, they summarized others, and others they explained to adapt them to the needs that the communities for whom they were writing had at the moment. The need to adapt Jesus' words to new and diverse demands influenced the order in which the facts are recounted in the four Gospels, as well as their coloration and importance, but they did not otherwise alter their fundamental truth.

That the evangelists had, insofar as it was possible at the time, a historical concern and not only a concern with edification, is demonstrated by the precision with which they situate the event of Christ in time and place. A little further on, Luke furnishes us with all the political and geographical coordinates of the beginning of Jesus' public ministry (cf. Luke 3:1-2).

In conclusion, the Gospels are not historical books in the modern sense of detached and neutral accounts of facts. They are historical, rather, in the sense that what they transmit reflects the substance of what happened. But the argument most in favor of the fundamental historical truth of the Gospels is that which we experience inside ourselves every time we are profoundly touched by the word of Christ. What other word, ancient or new, ever had the same power?

Wednesday Liturgy: Attending Sunday Mass at Other Parishes

ROME, JAN. 16, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: What is the position now on people not going to Sunday Mass in their own parishes? I know hundreds of people in this situation, yet always advise that, despite the horrors that they sometimes witness in their parishes, they should go. -- J.F., Manchester, England

A: This theme is dealt with in Canons 1247-1248 of the Code of Canon Law:

"Can. 1247 On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass ....

"Can. 1248 §1. A person who assists at a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day satisfies the obligation of participating in the Mass."

Thus, unlike the former code, the faithful are no longer obliged by law to attend Mass at their parishes on Sundays and holy days of obligations.

But this does not mean that they may be indifferent to the life of their local parishes. While speaking about the rights and duties of the faithful, canon law says:

"Can. 209 §1. The Christian faithful, even in their own manner of acting, are always obliged to maintain communion with the Church.

"§2. With great diligence they are to fulfill the duties which they owe to the universal Church and the particular church to which they belong according to the prescripts of the law.

"Can. 210 All the Christian faithful must direct their efforts to lead a holy life and to promote the growth of the Church and its continual sanctification, according to their own condition."

While a detailed commentary on these canons is beyond the scope of this column, they do imply that Catholics should, as far as possible, strive to be in full communion with their local parishes and support their pastors.

Some Catholics do not belong to territorial parishes but to so-called personal parishes whose jurisdiction is not so much tied to where they live but to other factors such as language, nationality, occupation, or particular rite. In these cases they should support this parish.

On the other hand, the faithful have a corresponding right to receive from their pastors authentic Catholic liturgy and doctrine and to develop their own spiritual life. To this the code says:

"Can. 213 The Christian faithful have the right to receive assistance from the sacred pastors out of the spiritual goods of the Church, especially the word of God and the sacraments.

"Can. 214 The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescripts of their own rite approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church and to follow their own form of spiritual life so long as it is consonant with the doctrine of the Church."

Therefore, Catholics should habitually support and participate at Mass at their own parish. This is the best way to form an authentic Christian community as charity toward others is a fruit of the Eucharist and of prayer.

Our reader also suggested that Catholics should attend their parishes in spite of defective practice and doctrine.

Certainly, one can do little to remedy possible limitations by remaining outside and complaining. Many times these errors continue more out of force of habit than out of bad faith, and change might be brought about by gentle persuasion.

Once more, canon law declares that the faithful have the right, and often the duty, to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on what pertains to the good of the Church (cf. Canon 212.3).

If nothing changes in spite of charitable efforts, then the following of this advice to remain would depend above all on the objective gravity of these defects.

If the objective defects constitute a danger to the Christian's faith, or to that of his or her children, or cause serious spiritual turbulence, then the person would be more than justified in worshipping somewhere else.

Subjective elements such as personal taste and religious sensibility are less weighty and might sometimes need to be sacrificed for the good of the community. However, some people might need a different religious atmosphere from that found in their parish in order to be able to worship.

If, however, they decide to attend Mass elsewhere for good practical or spiritual reasons, then they should still attempt to participate in the life of the parish as much as possible by sharing in other activities organized by the community.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Christmastide Custom

ROME, JAN. 16, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

As a conclusion to our several columns on Christmas themes (see Dec. 19), I would like to share with our readers the practice of a Sydney, Australia, parish led by the Conventual Franciscans.

This initiative, described by a reader, might be of help in other countries as well:

"On the feast of the Holy Innocents, the parish celebrated with the faithful, the annual Mass of the Holy Innocents. The main celebrant of the Mass was the Most Reverend Anthony Fisher, O.P, episcopal vicar for life and health for the Archdiocese of Sydney. The Mass is held annually on this date, for the reparation of the sin of abortion and sanctity of human life.

"Within the friary grounds, the Conventual Franciscan friars have established a Shrine for the Unborn. For the past 12 years, every month the faithful have gathered here for a Mass dedicated to the reparation of the sin of abortion and the sanctity of human life. This is preceded with 14 hours of adoration before the Blessed Sacrament."

Father Cantalamessa on Christ at Cana

ROME, JAN. 12, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of a commentary by the Pontifical Household preacher, Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, on the readings from this Sunday's liturgy.

* * *

Inviting Jesus to the wedding
Second Sunday in Ordinary Time
Isaiah 62:1-5; 1 Corinthians 12:4-11; John 2:1-11

The Gospel of the second Sunday in Ordinary Time is the episode of the wedding feast at Cana. What did Jesus want to tell us by participating in a wedding feast?

Above all, in this way he in fact honored the marriage between man and woman, implicitly reaffirming that it is a beautiful thing, willed by the Creator and blessed by him. But he wanted also to teach us something else. With his coming the marriage between God and humanity promised through the prophets was realized under the name of the "new and eternal covenant."

At Cana, symbol and reality meet: The human marriage of two young people is the occasion to speak to us of another marriage, that between Christ and the Church, which will be achieved in "his hour" on the cross.

If we want to find out how the relationship between a man and woman in marriage should be according to the Bible, we must look at the relationship between Christ and the Church. Let us try to do it following the thought of St. Paul on this theme as it is expressed in Ephesians 5:35-33. At the origin and center of every matrimony, according to this vision, there must be love: "You, husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her."

This affirmation -- that matrimony is based on love -- seems to us to be discounted today. But that marriage should be based on love is something that has only been recognized for little over a century, and it is still not recognized everywhere.

For centuries and millenniums, marriage was a transaction between families, a way of providing for the conservation of a patrimony or a social obligation. The parents and the families were the protagonists, not the spouses, who often did not know each other until the day of the wedding.

Jesus, Paul says in the text of Ephesians, gave himself up "that he might present the Church to himself in splendor without spot or wrinkle or any such thing." Is it possible for the human husband to emulate Christ the bridegroom even in this? Can he remove his wife's wrinkles? Certainly!

There are wrinkles that result from a lack of love, from being left alone. The woman who feels herself to still be important to her husband does not have wrinkles, or if she does, they are a different kind of wrinkles and they make her beauty grow rather than diminish it.

And wives, what can they learn from their model which is the Church? The Church makes herself beautiful only for her husband and not to please anyone else. She is proud and thrilled about her husband and does not cease to praise him. Translated onto the human plane this reminds fianceés and wives that their esteem and admiration is a very important thing for their fiancé or husband.

Sometimes to them this is the thing that counts the most in the world. It would be a grave thing to deny them this, to never have a word of appreciation for their work, for their ability to organize, their courage, their dedication to the family; for what he says, if he is a politician, for what he writes, if he is a writer, for what he paints, if he is an artist. Love is nourished by esteem and dies without it.

But there is something that the model of divine love calls husbands to above all: fidelity. God is faithful, always, despite everything. Today, this discourse about fidelity has become something rather delicate and no one any longer dares to risk it. And yet the principal reason for the disintegration of many marriages is precisely here, in infidelity. Some deny this, saying that adultery is the effect and not the cause of marriage crises. In other words, betrayal happens because there is nothing that exists any longer with one's spouse.

On occasion this is also true; but often what we have is a vicious circle. There is betrayal because the marriage is dead, but the marriage is dead precisely because treachery has already begun, perhaps at first only in the heart. That which is the most odious is when the traitor himself casts the fault entirely on the other and assumes the attitude of the victim.

But let us return to the Gospel episode, because it contains hope for all marriages, even the better ones. What happens in all marriages happens in the wedding feast at Cana. It begins with enthusiasm and joy (the wine is the symbol of this); but this initial enthusiasm, like the wine at Cana, comes to wane with the passage of time. Then things are done no longer for love and with joy, but out of habit. It descends upon the family, if we are not careful, like a cloud of sadness and boredom. Of this couple it must sadly be said: "They have no more wine!"

This Gospel episode points out to the couple a way to not fall into this situation or get out of if they are already in it: Invite Jesus to your wedding! If he is present, he can always be asked to repeat the miracle of Cana: transform the water into wine -- the water of habit, of routine, of frigidity, into the wine of love and joy better than the initial love and joy, just as the miraculous wine at Cana.

Inviting Jesus to your wedding means honoring the Gospel in your house, praying together, receiving the sacraments, taking part in the life of the Church.

Married couples are not always in the same place, religiously speaking. Perhaps one of them is a believer and the other is not, or at least not in the same way. In this case, the one who knows Jesus should invite him to the wedding and do it in such a way -- with kindness, respect for the other, love and coherence of life -- that Jesus soon becomes the friend of both. A "friend of the family!"

Markets and Morality: Debating the Role of Self-Interest

By Father John Flynn

ROME, JAN. 8, 2006 (Zenit.org).- Economic issues figured prominently among the end-of-year summaries offered by the media and commentators. The Christmas frenzy always brings with it concerns over excessive consumerism, added to which were reflections about inequality and the need for greater opportunities for developing nations.

Among the many analyses of these issues a couple of recent books are of interest. The first is "The Moral Ecology of Markets: Assessing Claims about Markets and Justice," by economist and theologian Daniel Finn.

The market economy is criticized for many shortcomings, but amid this debate most economists prefer to concentrate on empirical analysis, leaving aside questions of moral judgments. Nevertheless, Finn observes, morality forms an ineluctable part of our daily lives.

One problem when it comes to debating the morality of economic issues is the great variety of positions. The starting points and assumptions vary widely, according to what part of the political spectrum people occupy. Finn hopes to achieve in his book a common framework in which to examine key issues related to the market economy.

He starts by arguing that an adequate analysis of markets, whether it be from a supportive or critical perspective, must include a consideration of the moral underpinnings. The most obvious starting point for this is to look at the concept of self-interest.

Defenders of markets, Finn explained, follow in the footsteps of Adam Smith, and claim that good results can arise from complex systems of human interaction even when the individuals are not intending to generate those good outcomes. Egoism and greed no doubt exist, but through the mediation of markets, self-interest can work for the good.

Saints or sinners?

The concept of self-interest is not without its critics, continues Finn. For example, a theory that makes no distinction between a Mother Teresa and a thief -- positing that both are acting to further their respective self-interests -- is deficient. A description of the world that cannot distinguish between vice and virtue, saint or sinner, martyr or murderer, is seriously lacking in the ability to describe life's realities.

Other critics of self-interest point to problems such as large inequalities in wealth, and insufficient protection for the weak as evidence of the limitations of a system based on the pursuit of self-interest. Critics respond, Finn observes, by arguing that it is wrong to blame the market for all the evils in our society, which can stem from a variety of causes and cultural factors.

But defenders of the market face greater difficulties in responding to the accusation that a system based on self-interest foments greed. Defenders of the market point to its role in promoting virtues such as hard work, initiative and creativity, but critics point out that the utilitarian habit of basing actions on self-interest tends to spread into all areas of life, eventually undermining the moral standards on which the market itself depends.

When it comes to economic tasks such as the allocation and distribution of resources the free market does indeed have many advantages, concludes Finn. But economic production is just part of our lives and the application of behavior based on self-interest in other areas can create problems.

Even within the economic realm, acting solely on self-interest can sometimes not be enough. Finn cites the case of a consumer faced with the option of choosing between two products, one cheaper than the other because it is produced in a sweatshop. Self-interest would lead the consumer to opt for the cheaper product, but if the producer has success in selling these goods, it could reinforce the existence of exploitative work conditions.

This leads Finn to conclude that it is wrong to automatically suppose that it is either always morally wrong or right to act out of self-interest. The moral evaluation of any action in the market depends on a series of factors related to the context and the results.

Similarly, when it comes to a judgment of the market itself, Finn points out that it is not a simple choice between a free market or a centralized planning system. In practice, markets exist within a complex system of boundaries, or "fences" as he terms them, regarding their operation. The decision as to where these fences should be placed varies widely from situation to situation. In addition, markets exist within a social, political and cultural context that cannot be ignored.

Economic theology

Another recently published book on the subject of markets is "Adam's Fallacy: A Guide to Economic Theology," by Duncan Foley, economics professor at the New School for Social Research.

Like Finn, this author examines in detail the concept of self-interest in relation to markets, albeit in a more historical and less rigorously analytical way. The Adam referred to by Foley is Adam Smith, author of the classic economic text, "The Wealth of Nations."

The fallacy, according to Foley, "lies in the idea that it is possible to separate an economic sphere of life, in which the pursuit of self-interest is guided by objective laws to a socially beneficent outcome, from the rest of social life, in which the pursuit of self-interest is morally problematic and has to be weighed against other ends."

In his analysis of how markets work, Foley admits that the concept of pursuing self-interest proposed by Smith has a lot of sense and realism, but to describe it as a positive good is another question, he argues. The bulk of the book is then devoted to a synthesis of economic ideas put forward by a number of economic thinkers in the last couple of centuries.

In concluding, Foley comments that Smith himself realized better than many subsequent economic thinkers the limits of self-interest and the market. In addition to defending the advantages of a market system, Smith also recognized the need for political institutions to channel and control the operations of capital.

Contemporary capitalism is a successful system for the creation of wealth, but, Foley maintains, it is not some sort of automatic process inherent in human nature. Economic institutions are fragile and contingent and need to be shaped and guided. In addition, understanding how an economy works does not mean we should subsume our moral judgment to the logic of the market. Economic development brings with it many changes for society and culture, but the mistake would be to accept all these changes as something inevitable.

Charity

In the spirit of looking to complement and shape the operation of a market system, the Catholic Church proposes the virtue of charity. Benedict XVI, in his encyclical "Deus Caritas Est," explained that: "Building a just social and civil order, wherein each person receives what is his or her due, is an essential task which every generation must take up anew" (No. 28).

This is essentially a political task, in which the Church does not play a direct role, the Pope said. Yet the Church can contribute to this effort. "She has to play her part through rational argument and she has to reawaken the spiritual energy without which justice, which always demands sacrifice, cannot prevail and prosper."

One of arguments put forward by the Church concerns the role of love. "There is no ordering of the state so just that it can eliminate the need for a service of love," stated the Pontiff. "Whoever wants to eliminate love is preparing to eliminate man as such." This is worth keeping in mind when looking at how markets work.

Father Cantalamessa on the Epiphany of the Lord

ROME, JAN. 6, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of a commentary by the Pontifical Household preacher, Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, on the liturgical readings for the solemnity of the Epiphany.

* * *
The Signs of the Times
Isaiah 60:1-6; Ephesians 3:2-3a, 5-6; Matthew 2:1-12

"We celebrate three wondrous events on this holy day: Today the star leads the Magi to the stable, today the water is changed into wine at the wedding feast at Cana, today Christ is baptized by John in the Jordan for our salvation." With these words the liturgy describes today's feast; it consists in the triple revelation of Christ: to the magi, at the wedding feast at Cana, and in Jesus' baptism in the Jordan. Since ancient times, that which has brought about the unification of these three events in a single feast is their common theme of manifestation (in Greek "epiphania"). In these events Jesus progressively reveals what he is in reality, the Messiah and savior.

Christ reveals himself to all peoples and to each category of persons with signs appropriate and comprehensible to them. To simple shepherds he sends an angel; to the wise who scrutinize the courses of the heavenly bodies he sends a star; to the Jews attached to signs, he gives a sign, that is, a miracle: He changes water into wine.

With what signs does Christ manifest himself to the men of our time? The Second Vatican Council gave important attention to the "signs of the times" ("Gaudium et Spes," No. 11). Among these are the sense of solidarity and the interdependence that is developing between nations, Christian ecumenism, the promotion of the laity, the liberation of women, the new sense of religious freedom.

When Jesus spoke of the "signs of the times," he meant above all the messianic signs: "The blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are healed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, the poor have the good news preached to them" (Matthew 11:5). Are there such signs today? Certainly there are! The blind receive the light of faith and hope through contact with the word of God; the spiritually lame (and sometimes the physically lame) get up and walk; those who are prisoners in themselves, of evil, or of men, are freed from their chains; in sum, people are converted and live through the power of Christ and his Spirit.

Jesus insists on one of these signs in particular: "The good news is announced to the poor" (Luke 7:22). Is not the concern, typical of our time, that the Gospel be preached to the poor, a sign that Christ is at work in the Church? Perhaps today we are able to discover a new meaning in that saying of Jesus: "The poor you will always have with you but you will not always have me" (Matthew 26:11); that is to say: When I am no longer with you physically, the poor who represent me will be with you: do to them what you would do to me!

The bringing of the Gospel to the poor may sometimes appear too slow and uncertain and not always consistent, but it would be unjust to deny that there is alive in the whole Church an interest, a zeal -- which is also a positive sign -- a strong feeling in regard to the poor, whether they be individuals or an entire people. It is a new consciousness that "manifests" the power of the word of Christ.

These are some of the signs of the epiphany of Christ that continue to manifest themselves among us. We all have the task of discovering and evaluating these signs and becoming ourselves a sign of the presence of Christ in the world!

Father Cantalamessa on the Mother of God

ROME, JAN. 1, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of a commentary by the Pontifical Household preacher, Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, on the liturgical readings for today's solemnity of Holy Mary, Mother of God.

* * *

Numbers 6:22-27; Galatians 4:4-7; Luke 2:16-21

The council taught us to look upon Mary as a "figure" of the Church, that is, as the Church's perfect exemplar, as the first fruits of the Church. But can Mary be a model of the Church even as "Mother of God," the title with which she is honored this day? Can we become mothers of Christ?

Not only is this possible, but some fathers of the Church have said that, without this imitation, Mary's title is useless to me: "What does it matter," they said, "if Christ was once born to Mary in Bethlehem but is not born by faith in my soul?"

Jesus himself was the first to apply this title, "Mother of Christ," to the Church when he declared: "My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and put it into practice" (Luke 8:21).

Today's liturgy presents Mary to us as the first of those to become mother of Christ through attentive listening to his word. The Church has chosen for this feast the Gospel passage where it is written that "Mary, for her part, treasured all these words, meditating on them in her heart." How one concretely becomes a mother of Christ is explained to us by Jesus himself: hearing the word and putting it into practice.

There are two types of incomplete or interrupted motherhood. One is the old one which we know: early termination of the pregancy. This happens when a woman conceives a life but does not give birth to it because, in the meantime, either for natural causes or the sin of men, the child dies. Until a short time ago this was the only known form of incomplete motherhood.

Today, however, we know another which consists, on the contrary, in giving birth to a child without having conceived it. This happens when child is first conceived in a test tube and then inserted into the womb of a woman. In some terrible and squalid cases, the womb is borrowed, sometimes rented, to bear a human life conceived elsewhere. In this case, that which the woman gives birth to does not come from her, is not "first conceived in her heart."

Unfortunately, also on the spiritual plane there are these two sad possibilities. There are those who conceive Jesus without giving birth to him. Such are those who welcome the word without putting it into practice, those who have one spiritual abortion after another, formulating plans for conversion which are then systematically forgotten and abandoned at the halfway point; they behave toward the word as hasty observers who see their faces in a mirror and then go away immediately forgetting what they looked like (cf. James 1:23-24). In sum, these are those who have faith but not works.

On the other hand, there are those who give birth to Christ without having conceived him. Such are those who do many works, perhaps even good ones, which do not come from the heart, from love of God and right intention, but rather from habit, from hypocrisy, from the desire for their own glory or interests, or simply from the satisfaction of doing something, acting. In sum, these are those who have works but not faith.

These are the negative cases of an incomplete maternity. St. Francis of Assisi describes for us the positive case of a complete maternity which makes us resemble Mary: "We are mothers of Christ," he writes, "when we carry him in our hearts and our bodies through divine love and pure and sincere conscience; we give birth to him through holy works, which should shine as an example before others!"

We -- the saint says -- conceive Christ when we love him with sincerity of heart and with rectitude of conscience, and we give birth to him when we accomplish holy works that manifest him to the world.